Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:08:44 12/10/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 2001 at 18:43:43, David Hanley wrote: > >Yes, i know about bounds checker. Trust me, it won't catch everything, not by a >long shot, although it will catch some common bugs. The article you posted: > >http://www.microquill.com/prod_ha/ha_comp.htm > >Shows a lot of limitations of each tool. Look at: > >http://www.microquill.com/prod_ha/ha_comp.htm#4.2 It's 4 years old. Much more stuff has been included. Still, you can produce errors (I am sure) that do not get detected. >Don't like that one bit. > >I don't mean to rag on c, i'm still just pointing out there's some advantages to >be found in other languages that might be more important than the speed tradeoff >if you don't need to code a world-class engine. It's certainly true that there are trade-offs, advantages, and disadvantages with every language. I don't know a whole lot about some of the fringe languages and I like to hear what people have to say about them. I would be keenly interested to know about the progress of chess engines written in something unusual like Lisp, ML, or Snowball.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.